RE: [council] GNSO Council resolutions 7 May 2009

["Tim Ruiz" <tim@xxxxxxxxxxx>]

For the official minutes, in the listings of Councilors in Motion 2
below Mary Wong is not listed. 

Tim  

-------- Original Message --------
Subject: [council] GNSO Council resolutions 7 May 2009
From: Glen_de_Saint_Géry <Glen@xxxxxxxxx>
Date: Thu, May 07, 2009 2:21 pm
To: "council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx" <council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>

   
 Dear Councillors 
  
 Ahead of the official Council minutes, the following resolutions were
passed by the GNSO Council at the meeting on 7 May 2009.
  
 The final voting results on the motion on Post-Expiration Domain Name
Recovery, proposed by Avri Doria, and seconded by Chuck Gomes will be
published at the end of the absentee voting period which closes on
Sunday 10 May at 16:10 UTC.
  
 Motion I
 Motion on Post-Expiration Domain Name Recovery proposed by Avri Doria
and seconded by Chuck Gomes
  
 Whereas on 05 December 2008, the GNSO received an Issues Report on
Post-Expiration Domain Name Recovery (PEDNR);
  
 Whereas on 29 January 2009 the GNSO Council decided to form a Drafting
Team (DT) to consider the form of policy development action in regard to
PEDNR;
  
 Whereas a DT has formed and its members have discussed and reviewed the
issues documented in the Issues Report;
  
 Whereas the DT has concluded that although some further information
gathering may be needed, it should be done under the auspices of a PDP;
  
 Whereas staff has suggested and the DT concurs that the issue of
registrar transfer during the RGP might be better handled during the
IRTP Part C PDP.
  
 The GNSO Council RESOLVES
  
 To initiate a Policy Development Process (PDP) to address the issues
identified in the Post-Expiration Domain Name Recovery Issues Report.
 The charter for this PDP should instruct the Working Group:
  
 that it should consider recommendations for best practices as well as
or instead of recommendations for Consensus Policy;
 that to inform its work it should pursue the availability of further
information from ICANN compliance staff to understand how current RAA
provisions and consensus policies regarding deletion, auto-renewal, and
recovery of domain names during the RGP are enforced; and
 that it should specifically consider the following questions:
  
 . Whether adequate opportunity exists for registrants to redeem their
expired domain names;
  
 . Whether expiration-related provisions in typical registration
agreements are clear and conspicuous enough;
  
 . Whether adequate notice exists to alert registrants of upcoming
expirations;
  
 . Whether additional measures need to be implemented to indicate that
once a domain name enters the Auto-Renew Grace Period, it has expired
(e.g., hold status, a notice on the site with a link to information on
how to renew, or other options to be determined).
  
 . Whether to allow the transfer of a domain name during the RGP.
  
 The GNSO Council further resolves that the issue of logistics of
possible registrar transfer during the RGP shall be incorporated into
the charter of the IRTP Part C charter.
  
  
 
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
 Motion 2
  
 Motion on Producing Synthesis of Requirements for Whois Service Tools
  
 Avri Doria, seconded by Chuck Gomes proposed the following motion.
Friendly amendments were accepted.
  
 Whereas there have been discussions for several years on the adequacy
of the current set of Whois tools to provide the necessary functions to
support existing and proposed Whois service policy requirements,
  
 and, there have been questions as to the adequacy of these tools for
use in an IDN environment,
  
 and, that there have been extensive discussions about the requirements
of the Whois service with respect to Registry and registrar operations,
  
 and, new architectures and tools have been developed and suggested by
the technical community,
  
 and, the GNSO accepted the recommendation of the IRT-A Working Group to
encourage staff to explore further assessment of whether IRIS would be a
viable option for the exchange of registrant email address data between
registrars and conduct an analysis of IRIS' costs, time of
implementation and appropriateness for IRTP purposes,
  
 Resolved,
  
 The GNSO Council requests that Policy Staff, with the assistance of
technical staff and GNSO Council members as required, collect and
organize a comprehensive set of requirements for the Whois service
policy tools. These requirements should reflect not only the known
deficiencies in the current service but should include any possible
requirements that may be needed to support various policy initiatives
that have been suggested in the past.
  
 The synthesis of requirements should be done in consultation with the
SSAC, ALAC, GAC, the ccNSO and the GNSO and a strawman proposal should
be prepared for these consultations. The Staff is asked to come back
with an estimate of when this would be possible.
  
 Motion passed by voice vote.
One 'nay vote' was heard.
  
 Present at the time of voting: Mike Rodenbaugh, Zahid Jamil, Ute
Decker, Kristina Rosette, Cyril Chua, Tony Harris, William Drake, Carlos
Souza, Terry Davis, Avri Doria, Tim Ruiz, Stéphane van Gelder, Jordi
Iparraguirre, Edmon Chung, Chuck Gomes.
  
 Absent at the time of the vote: Philip Sheppard, Tony Holmes, Greg
Ruth, Adrian Kinderis, Olga Cavalli.
  
 Thank you.
 Kind regards,
  
 Glen
 GNSO Secretariat
 gnso.secretariat@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
 http://gnso.icann.org